Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
when bill clinton was running for president before and it didn't happen. our tax rates were higher and the world did not implode. >> bill clinton cut spending. >> bill clinton did cut spending. >> that's correct. >> bill clinton was worried about deficits. be obama is increasing spending. he wants tax credits and spending subsidies. >> this is not what with tax cuts to higher people -- >> i will ask you about when he talks about energy he is not talking about fraking or shale. he is talking about more green energy spending. that's the difference between him and clinton. >> appreciate that. what i'm saying is if you don't like the same as it ever was, let's have a conversation about the bush years if we are going to talk about what worked and didn't work, bush's policies did not work. if you don't believe me, look at the 4.5 million jobs. >> what do you mean? >> 2008 until january 2009, we lost 4.5 million jobs. >> do you know over the same time span that bush created more jobs. the bush recovery created more jobs than the obama -- >> what was -- >> even though the recession was muc
and bill clinton i am protested because of lies and coverups, where is the accountability in this administration, own up to the fact that we are at war with an evil force never be molified or satisfied until we're all dead. this is not about political offices or expanded geopolitical orders, this is about the survival of our civilization, if this administration can't or won't lead in the battle then step aside and let someone do it who won't lie to us and endanger our children. [applause] well, on friday, the office of the director of national intelligence issued a statement, attempting to put the matter to rest, going to washington is the chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge. why this document dump on a friday afternoon? >> well, you know, governor, as well as everyone else when you've got bad news, the place you put it is late on friday, what we had with the statement from director of national intelligence, a person who is a top intelligence officer in the united states government and i have the statement right here. and what i believe it does, seems to gi
. president obama had two appointees. george w. bush had two appointees. bill clinton had two. but there could be a bunch in a hurry. justice ginsburg is the most likely to leave. and if president obama wins, that wouldn't change the balance of five republicans and four democrats. but if the five-to-four balance shifts, you could see dramatic dramatic changes in the court. it all depends on who >> do you simply assume president obama would name someone like sonja sot ma yor or clarence thomas for that matter? can you just assume those would be the possibilit probabilities if you will? >> that is precisely what i would assume. you know, there's a mythology about the court that presidents often areurprised by how their justices turn out. but you know, that is very much the exception rather than the rule. if you look at the justices currently on the court right now, every single one of them has turned out more or less as re there are individual cases, there are surprises. i certainly was surpred by roberts' vote in the affordable care act case. hatlarge presidents w you e is what you get. iden yo
the tax rates in the united states, where they were during the bill clinton administration in '90s when the economy was doing just fine. what's wrong with that argument? >> nothing. but -- you need to do -- if you are going go down that path you have do that over time. can't do that cold turkey. i mean, that's just too much of a hit for our after-tax income. particularly in the context of what is still a very weak economy. if you want to go down that path, again, i don't think we need to, between don't need to see tax rates rise that much. if you want to go down that path, only way to make logical sense of that is phase that in over time so people can digest that and wouldn't push us back into a recession. i don't think we need go down that path. we need tax revenue, we need to see additional tax revenues generated. we don't need to see that much general rayed. that would be counter-produce. >> what if they let the taxes lapse for the wealthiest americans which is what president obama wanted those families making more than $250,000 a year, individuals making more than $200,000 a year, w
. they are not the gifted bill clinton kind. so what -- you tell me whether when we listen to these two guys wednesday night it will be how they convince us who has a better poll policy or it will be a moment like avoiding a tbaf, or like al gore seeing. >> we have a greater history of negative things happening in debates that change the trajectory of races. so don't screw up. that's rule number one. but rule number two, if you are mitt romney when you go into this debate you need to change the trajectory of this. you can't do it by being a human fact checker. but what you can do is remember you are talking to tens of millions of american voters that night and whatever the question is, whatever obama says, mitt romney has to make sure he puts a simple clear statement of his views and his beliefs about the future of the united states on the record. it's his chance to put it on the record so he can't screw around. >> i would recommend him not telling too many jokes. he needs to be very careful. >> this economy is no laughing matter. i think most people will be be watching this debate in the hope of who they c
who will be here wednesday, bill clinton, the former president stumping for barack obama. you ask what the polls look like. this is from american research group. you can see the president with a five point advantage within that survey psychology error. another poll had a slightly larger advantage for the president. it's competitive here in new hampshire. >> the debates are so critical. it's hard to say whether these debates are more important than other debates we've heard. what are the candidates doing and have to accomplish in terms of hitting home their major points? >> reporter: exactly. so much on the line wednesday night when president obama and mitt romney showed up for the first time since colorado. what are they doing today? mitt romney in massachusetts preparing and the president in washington. they are probably doing debates with their stand-ins. senator rob portman is doing the sta stand-in for mitt romney and done it in the past. and they go back to massachusetts. who better than a massachusetts politician to play mitt romney. that person is senator john kerry, the senior
place than we currently are? was bill clinton right during the democratic national convention when he said no one, no president, could have had this type of recovery and dealt with it, republican or democrat. >>guest: the problem with that line that this is the best we can do, always played the clips, that was president obama, and vice president biden and so many of the economists who told us four years ago we are going to get out of this mess and we will have a very robust recovery. i just shows the clip and president obama said he would be a one-termer if things are not turned around. have we turned things around? it is dicey. if you look at what happened this week with the g.d.p. numbers that came out, very weak, 1.3 percent growth. that is a third of where we should be. we have $5 trillion in debt. the deficit has not been cut in half. instead, it has actually doubled. when president came in it was $500 billion and now it is $1 trillion. the theme of the re-election campaign could be promises made, promises broken. >> the argument is this recession is different than any we have se
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)